Dame Judi Dench Is Back For The Next 007 Film!!

James Bond megasite MI6 says that, at the South Bank Sky Arts Awards, Dame Judi Dench told media folk that she is, indeed, returning for another round as "M" in the next 007 movie - which we already knew will return Daniel Craig and be directed by Sam Mendes (AMERICAN BEAUTY, ROAD TO PERDITION, JARHEAD).

Dench's appearance in the pictutre isn't a tremendous surprise all things being equal. But, given BOND 23's troubled and wobbly path to the screen (MGM's recent financial woes), nothing could be taken for granted. I really like her take on "M" - it'll be great to have her back.

remember, when they hired marc forster for AQOS? nobody expected an contentless action tour de force from him, but then...
so let´s see, how slow-burn a mendes-driven bond-movie will be...
i´m excited... a bit.

Well, they aren't fixing one of the broke things about 007. I liked Dench when she was first introduced as M ,as she kept it professional. Last film she was wheelin her arse around to Bond. Talk about fucking ridiculous. She's the head of MI6...why would she be travelling around to pander to Bond?
That and about a million other things made the last Bond film unwatchable. In my opinion, Dench needs to be replaced with a male and they need to change the role so M sits in a fucking office again and doesn't keep travelling to check on Bond like he's the only agent who exists.
Tim-Pigott smith is the perfect choice. He had a brief scene in the last film basically playing M and chided Dench's character. I found it ironic.

but this is BOND, for Chrissakes. If they spend too long brooding about character motivation/childhood abuse in his past/blah blah blah I will not be pleased.
<P> Let's all try to remember THIS IS AN ACTION MOVIE FRANCHISE. It doesn't need to be fucking DEEP. I do not go to a Bond flick to be enlightened or educated about the human condition. Capish?

Dame Judy is the best thing to come to the MI-6 office since Bernard Lee left. No one else has had the charisma that she brings to the role. Not to mention what a great actress she is.
Plus Bond needs a Mother figure much as Bernard Lee provided a Father figure.

Dench is one of the few words that rhymes with "stench", which is what I smelled while watching Quantum of Solace. But I don't blame Judy for that (yes, we're on a first name basis). I blame that ridiculously big eyeball that was projected behind the opera! I can't get that fucking eyeball out of my head! Everytime I think of that movie, that fucking eyeball is looking at me!

It would be the best thing for the series. The kid could, like, always get Bond in trouble. But then, when it really counted, the kid could help him get out of a bad situation.
Also, they could have scenes with the kid listening outside the door while Bond is shagging the lady. And the kid could just roll is eyes like "here we go again..." but the audience thinks it's funny.
I think a good Bond sidekick name would be Jimmy Wand becuase Jimmy is another name for James and Wand rhymes with Bond.

I respectfully disagree. I admit the last outing was lackluster, but this is the moment for Craig to become Bond. The series has always had a hard time balancing taking itself too seriously, and slipping into camp. Every so often it hits stride and the "classic" Bond movies emerge. This is Craig's opportunity to shine - before he starts driving and invisible car, flying in space, or riding a moon buggy around in the Nevada desert.

Dench being wheeled around the globe was yet another way the producers were trying to emulate the Bourne franchise. They were essentially trying to give Bond his own version of Pamela Landy.
From all early accounts, EON has learned absolutely nothing about why QOS didn't work. I would say it's surprising they aren't making an effort to distance themselves from such a disastrous installment, but I guess it truly is the Barbara Broccoli Show at this point.

Please do us a favor, lochray. Do not "respectfully disagree" in these talkbacks ever again. My brother Harry would be very upset if he saw how polite you are being. I don't want you to get banned.
Also, Harry, please give me a call. I have something funny to tell you.
-Larry

when they did the reboot with Casino Royale but she did show good chemistry with Craig and I liked that they made her character more motherly. But I didn't like how she was handled in Quantam of Solace. She came off as this whiny hag or believed any lie being reported about Bond and did we really need to see her taking a bath and rubbing her face with lotion while she's talking business? I mean what's next, her taking another MI-6 call while sitting on the throne doing a number 2?

I don't really care about who plays M anymore.
I'm still bitter that they killed off Mathis.
He had such potential as a character.
Might as well have Felix lose his lower body to some sharks!
Oh, yeah, they did that...

[q] Not while Daniel "one dimension" Craig is in the title role.
Seriously, I'm not saying this to be contraversial or contrary, I realy mean it. In both CR and QoS, Craig goes through both films with just one expression on his face, of indignant, cocky, represessed anger.
The rare times he breaks out of this singular poe faced expression - for example when he is on the train in CR - he is portrays just stone faced arrogance.
Sorry, but Daniel Craig has ruined the Bond series, together with hack screenwriters Purvis & Wade and Eon's insistence in distancing the latest movies from the Bond trademarks (the Bond theme, Moneypenny, Q, the gadgets, the gun barrel and above all some fucking humor!). [/q]
Woah dude. Vehement disagreement. Craig's Bond is for this 40 something idiot THE Bond. Screw the humour, James Bond is a barely restrained thug. Daniel Craig is that thug. Just imho...

The only normal happy people are gay people. Ex-Military are child-beating, repressed, homophobic murderers. Average middle aged men scheme to fuck High School girls. If your underage daughter runs off with a drug dealer that's a good thing. Because drug dealers are authentic, sensitive artists who can see the beauty in the world. Ah, Hollywood.

It'll be some obvious choice like Sean Connery, or Michael Caine, or Anthony Hopkins, etc...
There are no GOOD elder-statesmen espionage actors anymore. The good ones are all dead.
Sam Neill could probably do the job in a not-too-terrible manner.
It'll never happen, but I'd LOVE to see Peter Capaldi play M!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjAyazqtQj8

I would apologise for being polite in my last talkback post, but I'm afraid that would probably anger you. So, if it makes you happy (Gawd, I'm so Canadian), here is a reiteration of my previous post, sans politeness: You fucker, you don't know shit. Craig is balls out Bond, they just need to get their crap together. What kind of giant retard are you not to see that I'm right, and you are an ignorant cock sucker. More Craig as Bond, mutherfuckahhhs. He's better than George "I must have sucked off the produces to get this job" Lazenby.
Hope that worked better for you, Larry.

lochray-
Way to release you're inner Talkbacker! I bet you feel much better now. I like you (and I'm sure my brother Harry would too ;)). Your inclusion of the term "giant retard" was particularly inflamatory and disrespectful! I appreciate you taking the time to rework your original post into this more AICN-appropriate tone and phrasing.

Yeah. Dench is awesome. But if these new Daniel Craig films are a reboot of the series, then why try and establish a connection with the Brosnan movies? The role should've been re-cast.
In GoldenEye, she's the latest person to hold the rank of M. AND she acknowledges Bond's previous long career as a 00 agent before her tenure began...
Yet she's back in Casino Royale giving Bond his first ever assignment as a 00 agent?
On the Bond websites when someone addresses this, they often say "it's a different M".
But if it's a different M, why cast the same actress?
The films are good and she's good in them, there's no doubt about that. But since MGM and the Broccoli's were so intent on rebooting Bond and moving it away from the Brosnan era, I don't know why they'd risk potentially confusing the audience...

Your Peter Capaldi suggestion for M is inspired. I also think M should have been recast for Casino Royale. The reboot of the franchise didn't quite work for this reason. I'd really like to see the return of Q and Moneypenny too.

There would also have to be a scene with the sidekick looking longingly at the Aston Martin and saying, "I need a car; chicks dig the car."
And then Bond says, "This is why super spies work alone."
Comedy gold.

in Batman Begins
made ZERO sense as CR was supposed to be a Batman Begins style reboot
plus M in the novel was a man and it was time for a dude to be M again after 4 films.
my choice wouldve been someone obvious like Patrick Stewart, Hopkins, Caine, Gambon, McKellan, T Stamp, Rickman, Hurt or even Dalton
out of that bunch probably Stamp (as the others have been in like EVERYTHING the past decade....and Dalton might have been too much of a wink/nod for CR as it was supposed to be dead serious)
seriously get rid of Dench for Craigs forth one and get Stamp or Dalton

And she could play it in a similar manner to Bernard Lee. Not only would that rock, it would be hilarious and very cool. I'm totally over Densch as "M". Great actress, but should have been left behind with Brosnan.

Yeah, that's right. And, of course, Bond hates being called "JB." So, he repeatedly, and ever more angrily, has to say, "My name is Bond... JAMES BOND!"
And the sidekick goes, "Yeah, whatever JB!"
Which just makes Bond fume.
More comedy gold.

they couldve easily made it a sequel. and had Brosnan.
plus i guess then it wouldve just felt another Bond movie (allbeit a bit rougher and grittier)
recasting AND doing a reboot (inspired by Batman no doubt) refreshed the series

And for the stupid bulldog face comment, dude, you're gonna get either an old woman or an old man to play this part. The part has always called for some old because of all their years in MI6, hence the higher rank. Kabish?

and do something crazy like set it on Mars or have Bond thrown back in time to 1962 or have bond finding aliens or something...
im bored of all the real world stuff like in CR and QOS....give me a sci fi Bond instead

Brosnan was pretty much a combination of Connery and Moore - and so were the movies he did. I read recently when he saw Casino Royale he said something like 'thats how i wanted to do it all!'
i always thought TND was Brosnans best
-the opening sequence was the best Brosnan opening (even better than GEs bungey jump) - the way he just suddenly switches into full on Bond mode and takes everyone out when he realises the shits about to hit the fan.
-the end song Surrender - one of the best and certainly the best song of the Brosnan era
-Stamper - a worthy henchman
-all the John Woo style action
-Awesome David Arnold score
-Remote control BMW
-Walther P99 intro (good to have a change from the outdated PPK - which still appeared)
-nice references to previous Bonds (TMWTGG island, TSWLM style stealth ship and climax, water scenes, satallite scenes, Commander uniform)
-Brosnan looked his best in TND and is at his most bad ass out of his 4 films (killing Kaufman, taking out everyone in the intro, taking out about 5 guys in the sound booth, neat vodka in the hotel room before banging Lois & the TND hotel chilled vodka scene = pure Fleming )
Id put TND just before GE in fact...then TWINE and DAD last (1st half is pretty good but when Halle Berry and the ice palace appears it all goes to shit)

itd be cool if some other studio found a loophole and made a Never Say Never style Bond with Brosnan.
or maybe Q Tarentino could just do a spy film and have Brosnan in there (obviously as Bond but his name and 00 number is never mentioned and never wears a tux)...Characters like M could remain as theres an M in real life...the villain could be anyone, not take over the world stuff. there could be real gritty realisim..even more so than Craig Bond or Bourne - almost verging on John Le Carre. Low budget with swearing, brutal violence, sex, R rating, real adult stuff. ditch any music score. maybe even set it in the 60s
give it some made up bond style name like 'Never Say Die.'
somewhat similar to The Matador or The Tailor of Panama but more Bond like than those

Should bring back basil or whatever his name is from never say never again. And he should say I hope we're going to have some gratuitous sex un what like violence. Then Bond plays atari centipede and it electrocutes him.

With the exception of GoldenEye, all the Brosnan movies were cartoons. Not his fault obviously. He was probably the most balanced Bond of them all though. As Cartmanez pointed out, his Bond had a little bit of every Bond that came before.

if Dench's casting happened in order to erase the innuendo of sexism in the Bond franchise and modernize the Brosnan reboot and continue with the Craig reboot,i dont see why something similar shouldnt happen with the subtextual racism of the franchise.
Because lets face it,in all these movies Bond looks more like a super-spy lapdog who protects the interests of the Queen and her WASP Empire (what has left of it) rather than a super-spy who has a higher,more noble mission,that of saving the world from powerful evil doers.
Now an Indian M would ofc seem as a reminiscent of the British Empire,but eventually he would serve better the movie:
1.times change,and though once people like Indian were enslaved to British,now they can even be their bosses in a more civilized era.
racism wont be a sub-textual thorn in the appeal of the Bond movies.
2.Bond wont seem that he works only to protect the interests of rich,white,guys.With an Indian M,Bond would be seen more as someone who serves a greater good the interests of Commonwealth in this case,which for starts it will give a more worldwide,multi-national aspect of his job and make it seem more important and noble.
Now i know the above might not work like that in a Bond movie,but as i said,if you can have a woman as Bond's boss,why not having an Indian boss as well? and no,the CIA agent in the Bond movies who turned black since the 80s does not count.
And as Q is concerned,they should bring him back and i cant understand why the producers havent done so until now.We have 2 Craig movies without him and there is no Q announcement for the 3rd one.even Craig has expresses concern that Q has not yet returned to the franchise.
I bet that the producers are afraid that Q somehow will bring back the cheese and campiness,which they tried so much to get rid off in the first place in the Craig reboot.
but if thats the case,then they are fucking wrong.It's not Q's fault if the producers have used him as a comedy relief for the past Bond movies and they especially tried to enhance that with the Cleese casting.
Q is a cool character and he should be brought back.I always liked his relationship with Bond,it seemed a bit paternal to me,he loved B as a friend and he was always there to protect and help his with his genius gadgets.
Producers bring back Q,make him less comedic and more serious if you want and keep that paternal relationship and cast Sylvester McCoy to play him,that way you can have two iconic characters (in a way) in the same film.
OR do the opposite thing.cast a very,young,new coming,british actor who will be a teenager super-genius tech-wiz Q.
that way he can serve as a younger,more joyful and less serious but more refreshing opposite to Dunch's elder,stricter,stiff and more serious M character and it will add to the movies an appeal for the younger audience.
he would be a friend with whom Bond could discuss things that he couldnt with M: women,fast cars,etc ,they could drink some beer while this young Q was explaining to Bond how his new hacking device works etc,making pranks to stiff M (ok scratch the last ones)
but more importantly the paternal relationship
between the previous older Q and Bond,would be in reversal here: have a backstory for the young Q,maybe Bond saved him from the claws of some evil guys who wanted to use his talent for their own means.Bond saves him and seeing how genius he is,he bring him to the MI6 where he soon becomes the new Q.
but because he is young,hot tempered,his sexual hormones are high,he is irresponsible,reckless,and revolts against any kind of authority,Bond will be there to advise him,help him out and protect him like the old Q did with him.
regardless of how the producers will handle the young Q,it is a change that can be lead to some interesting interaction with Bond and help give a new aspect to this longtime and beloved character.

Bond is a rank. Your name is given to you, like your 00 number. <br><br>
I mean, come on -- In OHMSS, Lazenby refers to "the other fellow"; there has been character continuity throughout the entire series; it's not the sixties anymore... This is just a new Bond finding his way.<br><br>
I love Craig as Bond, I love Dench as M. I do want a Moneypenny and a Q (I'd actually be fine with John Cleese playing it straight), getting back to the Bond "formula", although turning it on its head from time to time would be good.

Prior to Casino Royale, all the Bonds referenced the death of Tracy in some small way: Moore in TSWLM and FYEO, Dalton in LTK, and Brosnan in TWINE. The latter two were subtle, but were clearly meant to suggest it was the same character.
Of course, Lazenby and Brosnan were also shown discovering old gadgets from the Connery era, with the implication that they remembered them well.
If the producers had wanted to adopt or lend credibility to the "codename" theory, they had the perfect opportunity to do so with Casino Royale. Instead, they were scared audiences might not think it was the same old Bond and decided to keep Dench as M. (Even though it made no sense for her to act as if she'd never seen Bond before.)

M should have been recast for the Daniel Craig reboot films. Dame Judi Dench played M beginning with Goldeneye in which her predecessor, known by Bond, was referenced. That meant she was the new "M", not the same M he had been working with for years. Since Casino Royale was a reboot, the role should have been recast so as not to confuse the issue of whether this was the same character we have always known (which it is). James Bond is his name. 007 is his code name. The actors are different, but the character is the same.

they need to film it asap and get it out of the way so we can, hope against hope, get a "real" James Bond movie again. I'd rather see Brosnan come back and do a "final mission" type of story. Whatever.....

A horribly wooden performance of an utterly hateful character. Let's hope this is the last film for her and Craig's ugly, sneering, humourless, Bond.
Why do I even care about a series that hasn't risen above mediocrity in the last 20 years?

The point is, we have an actor playing Bond who wasn't even born until there were five films in the can. If it were the same Bond, he'd be 80 now (the current age of Sean Connery).<br><br>
The theory that Bond is a rank is the best one.

Puh-leeze. That era is gone, gone, gone. EVERYBODY has "Bondian" gadgets now. (Just look at your smartphone.)
Dench will do one more, then she's done. I, too, believe CR should've recast the part (for a "clean" reboot), but overall she's been a net plus for the franchise.
Her replacement as M should be... TIMOTHY DALTON. He'd make an awesome M... Have him grow a beard & wear reading glasses; MI6 underlings should address him as "Admiral" (ex-Royal Navy), so those of us old enough to remember his time as Bond won't think he's the retired 007.
I'd love it if Bond 23 was called SHATTERHAND.
(Blofeld's alias from the novel "You Only Live Twice", Dr. Guntram Shatterhand, has never been used in the film series. Well, they need to use it, damn it!)

Nothing against Dame Judy, but her M was clearly a mid-90's knee jerk reaction to the appointment of Stella Rimington as the actual head of MI5 here in the UK, the first woman to hold the post.
I have always seen M as an experienced and knowledgable former agent who is one of the few people who can put Bond in his place, and for whom Bond has professional respect. The role needs someone who can go toe to toe with Craig's Bond, and who you would expect to emerge victorious.
Brian Cox perhaps?

It's weird, I thought of that too. I think for audiences outside of England it would definately work because Caine has that whole 'authoritative wisdom' quality and can play stern characters well like when he played Scrooge.
I'm not sure how audiences in England would react to a guy with such a working class accent in a position of that prestige. Caine did play a more poncey bloke in ZULU and it didn't bug anybody, so it probably would work.
I think Judi Dench as M during the Brosnan films was there more as a ballbuster to atone for the Bond character's legacy as a mysogynist. Dench in the Craig Bonds seems to have taken on a slightly more motherly quality, like she's the only one who understand Bond and she gives him emotional support but occassionally scolds him too.

No it's not - it's a load of toss.
Is 'Felix Leiter' a rank? Is 'Blofeld'?, Is 'Moneypenny'?, is 'boothroyd'?
I find it funny that some Bond fans have no problem with 007 going into space, battling ghosts and doing 101 things per film that are literally impossible but the idea that it could be the same man over 20 films (the Craig Bond is set in a different universe altogether - one of the stupidest creative decisions in the history of film making) makes them wet their pants.
Anyway, if you do have a problem - try these ideas for size:
1. Bond was in his 20's in Dr No and in his 60's for his final mission (y’know, like Rambo and Indiana Jones) in Die another Day.
2. The Bond films don't take place in the years they were made - so Bond is only, say, 20 years older in DAD than he was in Dr No
3. Given that movie Bond exists in a world of magic and unbelievable scientific advancement - maybe he just took a few pills that extended his life by 20 years or so.
4. IT'S JUST A FILM!!!!!! Just enjoy it and stop trying to force real life dynamics of something that doesn't even exist.
That's my favourite one.

would have a field day ....'OMG hes obviously the same character from TLD/LTK so 007/Bond IS a codename!'
then they could make the movie we all desperatly want to see: -
Craig Bond vs Brosnan Bond
Caine wouldve been good as he was Harry bleedin Palmer wasnt he. so itd be fun speculating on if he really was Palmer (as Ms name is never revealed)
Ian Holm wouldve also been pretty good as M (can imagine him giving bond his orders in that famous voice)

for (i.e. each actor to play Bond was a different agent using the codename 'james bond' and the number '007'):
-changing face,
-same bond from 1962 would be in his 80s now...
-‘this never happened to the other chap,‘
-Dench as M in CR acting as if it were a totally new guy
-Never Say Never Again could be considered an 'official' Bond movie
-THE ROCK could be considered a bond movie :)
against: (i.e. its the same bond from Dr No to DAD...until CR when the series is rebooted)
-references to Bonds dead wife in Moore, Dalton and Brosnan movies
-Bond looking at gadgets referencing previous missions of 'other' Bonds (e.g. OHMSS, DAD)
-would possibly mean Felix and Moneypenny and Blofeld were also a 'codename' (but not M and Q)
-switching actors in other movies when actors is too old or unavaiable is considered normal and not meant to mean its a different character
-its not meant to be - (if it were they could have past Bonds cameoing as M or even Bonds dad! )

the opening when the 3 agents jump out the plane and two get killed but Dalton kicks ass. i thought the other 2 were meant to be Connery and Moore ...Im pretty sure one of them even looked a little Moore-ish so i cannot be laughed at too much!

at least not in the way he was used in the old Bond films. In the Fleming books, Q was a pretty minor character. I like Bond having gadgets but I'd rather them not be such a focal point in the movies. However, I think it would be a good idea to introduce a character who acts as some kind of mentor to him when he needs help on his missions.

Either would do a fine job as M and would play well off Craig. The best news though would be if the producers finally put Purvis and Wade out to grass. (Which should have happened after Die Another Day).

The only problem with underplaying Q is that audiences want/expect a traditional Q appearance along with his usual array of fun gadgets. (And after the last film, even the critics were calling for his return.)
I think the series needs to sober up every now and then, but at the same time, that's not what built the franchise or has helped it endure for so long. Audiences have always turned to Bond for fantasy, as well as all the elements he has become synonymous with: Beautiful women, clever gadgets, exotic locales, and memorable stunts, etc.
If Dr. No had just been a generic action film- with a somber hero that took everything seriously- we wouldn't even be talking about Bond today.

1) There is a new Bond film and the director is...
2) ....is playing Bond this time around..
3) ...will be the sexy new Bond Girl
4) ...is the Badguy and ... is the henchman
5) ...is M
6) Bond just started filming himself walking down the street in... *random exotic locale*
7) Bond just started filming an underwater scene
8) Bond just started filming the ski chace...
9) The car chase has begun! This time it will be an Aston Martin vs a ...
10) Here is a pic of the 2011 Aston Martin
11) ....is singing the main title song...

...and Quantum of Solace really wasn't. It's really that simple. Just because the sequel was poorly conceived and messily directed, we shouldn't forget how well the reboot worked (even if the first film could have lost the last 20 minutes or so...) and start pining for the cartoonish rubbish that the franchise had become. As for harking back to the 'golden years', Connery's first two films - the best in the series - were as grounded as 'Casino', just a different era.
Oh, and in response to Larry Knowles' "Bond Names for your Schlong" request, it's got to be "The Honey Rider", surely?

Why is Roger Moore's Bond visiting Tracey's grave at the start of "For Your Eyes Only"? (killed in a movie where Bond was played by George Lazenby)
(Barbara Bach also mentions the incident to Roger Moore's Bond in "The Spy Who Loved Me", and Moore's Bond looks visibly upset by the mention of it... why would he care if he wasn't the same person it happened too?)
And why are references made to Timothy Dalton's Bond "one being married" in Licence To Kill? (Again, a reference to that movie where Bond was played by George Lazenby)
And in Die Another Day, in which Bond is played by Pierce Brosnan, why does he enquire whether the rocket pack from "Thunderball" (in which Bond is played by Sean Connery) still works? (showing familiarity with it...)
The whole "Bond is a codename" thing is moot. OF COURSE it's supposed to be the same person!

"Her replacement as M should be... TIMOTHY DALTON. He'd make an awesome M... Have him grow a beard & wear reading glasses; MI6 underlings should address him as "Admiral" (ex-Royal Navy), so those of us old enough to remember his time as Bond won't think he's the retired 007."
Errr...Bond IS ex-Royal Navy. So how does that work? Or are you saying that Bond would never have risen to the rank of admiral once moving to MI6? I guess that WOULD make his ascension to admiral fairly unlikely.
I do like the idea of Dalton as M. Dalton is pretty great in everything. People often rattle on about how awesome Brian Blessed is in Hodges' "Flash Gordon" but overlook the fact that Dalton is fucking brilliant as Barin.

It would be interesting if he wasn't played for comic relief...if he was a geek, but a serious and smart one, good at analysing people and motives as well as technology. Perhaps suggested tactics for missions rather than merely throwing some new toys at Bond in a contextual vacuum and hoping that some of it would come in useful. (It always did, of course: http://tinyurl.com/4dwvzth .)